This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: va_arg regression from 2.95.2 to 3.1
- From: "Schirmer, Hartmut" <HSchirmer at Innovative-Systems dot de>
- To: "'Richard Henderson'" <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>, "'gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 07:40:01 +0200
- Subject: RE: va_arg regression from 2.95.2 to 3.1
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:rth@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 11:54 AM
> To: Nathan Sidwell
> Cc: Joseph S. Myers; Schirmer, Hartmut; 'gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org';
> gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: va_arg regression from 2.95.2 to 3.1
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 05:24:07PM +0000, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > "Joseph S. Myers" wrote:
> >
> > > I think the argument is correct, and that this call to
> va_arg should be
> > > considered the same as a call where the types turn out to
> be incompatible
> > > at runtime (except here, the runtime type cannot be
> compatible). It ought
> > > to be a mandatory warning (not pedwarn, not error); and
> should either be
> > > compiled into a call to abort() or be treated as a call
> to va_arg with the
> > > promoted type followed by conversion to the type specified.
> > I agree.
>
> Ok, two's good enough. Addressed as follows.
>
>
> r~
>
Thanks.
Hartmut